You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Title |
The Structure and Function of Research Ethics Committees in Africa: A Case Study
|
---|---|
Published in |
PLOS Medicine, January 2007
|
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040003 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Nancy E Kass, Adnan Ali Hyder, Ademola Ajuwon, John Appiah-Poku, Nicola Barsdorf, Dya Eldin Elsayed, Mantoa Mokhachane, Bavon Mupenda, Paul Ndebele, Godwin Ndossi, Bornwell Sikateyo, Godfrey Tangwa, Paulina Tindana |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 174 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Colombia | 2 | 1% |
South Africa | 2 | 1% |
Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
Austria | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Sierra Leone | 1 | <1% |
Belgium | 1 | <1% |
Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
Other | 2 | 1% |
Unknown | 161 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 17% |
Researcher | 26 | 15% |
Student > Master | 25 | 14% |
Professor | 13 | 7% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 6% |
Other | 49 | 28% |
Unknown | 21 | 12% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 50 | 29% |
Social Sciences | 29 | 17% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 7% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 5% |
Psychology | 8 | 5% |
Other | 39 | 22% |
Unknown | 27 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2016.
All research outputs
#3,622,206
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#3,206
of 5,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,159
of 173,591 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#31
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,161 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 77.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 173,591 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.